State Papers Confidential

Gale Primary Sources Start at the source.

Professor Jeremy Black

University of Exeter

Various source media, State Papers Online

EMPOWER™ RESEARCH The provision of information by diplomats was but part useful.[5] In 1730, State Papers Prussia (SP 90) contains of the process by which the British government intercepts of the secret correspondence of the Prussian acquired knowledge about the capability and intentions minister, General Grumbkow, and Benjamin of foreign powers. Much of this process did not involve Reichenbach, the Prussian Resident in London[6]. Sir diplomats. Indeed, a key aspect of the application of Charles Hotham, envoy for George II, was instructed to science in diplomacy was the development of secure the disgrace of the former and the recall of the codebreaking in so-called Black Chambers. Although latter on the grounds that they were attempting to the use of cryptography was longstanding, the rise of thwart a reconciliation between Britain and Prussia. the Black Chambers was basically an eighteenth- Foreign diplomats were well aware that the post was century phenomenon, being introduced for example in opened and the crucial element was not this the United Provinces in 1707, in part in response to interception, but, rather, the deciphering. This was a events in the War of the Spanish Succession and to skill the British possessed in abundance, especially changes and tensions in inter-allied

[1] after the appointment of the Reverend Edward Willes, relationships. Such activity was encouraged by the later a conscientious Bishop of Bath and Wells, as extent to which formal diplomatic processes were Decipherer in 1716, a post he held until his death in encouraged by secret diplomacies: differing networks 1773. Earlier, in an important link with the world of of command and control that arose from the personal science, the post had been held in 1701-3 by John role of the Crown and from ministerial struggles, as Wallis, an eminent mathematician. From Willes' with the Secret de Roi in France and the private appointment the decipherer's office was continually correspondence with Austrian envoys of ministers,

[2] staffed by members of his family until its abolition in notably Prince Eugene, the War Minister. 1844, and from 1762 onwards the entire office were In Britain, the important role of the Post Office in the members of the family. From 1701, when the office was interception of foreign diplomatic correspondence[3] is placed on a regular basis, until 1722, the salaries were reflected in State Papers 107, but the series is paid at the Exchequer, thereafter by the Secretary of incomplete. Much was clearly due to inadvertent the Post Office, out of the Secret Service money, until destruction: 'they were thrown in a closet as papers of 1782, when the office was placed under the authority of no consequence, and … an immense quantity the newly-created Foreign Office.[7] perished'[4] The uneven nature of the series is readily The success of the office can be gauged from SP 107, apparent. For example, eleven volumes of intercepts State Papers Foreign, Confidential. Its contents proves survive for 1733, but no letters for 1735, and there are the office's ability to decipher the codes of most none for the period October 1745 to October 1751. European states, including Austria, Bavaria, Denmark, However, there are also intercepts in other series in the France, Hesse-Cassel, Modena, Naples, the Palatinate, National Archives, although the absence of a catalogue Parma, Portugal, Prussia, Russia, Sardinia, Saxony, creates serious problems for searchers. Intercepts Spain, Sweden, Tuscany, the United Provinces (Dutch) could be sent to envoys who it was felt would find them and Venice.[8] Although the office was frequently tested

by new cipher keys, evidence of a failure to decipher is had been Foreign Secretary of the Post Office since rare, whether of intercepts that were incompletely 1752, referred to the problems facing the decipherers, deciphered or not deciphered at all, or references to he noted that three Russian ciphers as well as the the problem in correspondence. Swedish cipher had been broken.[14]

Much of the strength of the British information system Interceptions were useful for a number of reasons, derived from allied co-operation, and the efforts made including the political one of strengthening the ministry by ministers and diplomats in sustaining that co- by discrediting its opponents. They also threw much operation began before the accession of George I or light on the foreign perception of British politics. example, William III was supplied with correspondence Horace Walpole recorded an event that allegedly between Paris, Copenhagen and Stockholm intercepted occurred soon after the death of Queen Caroline in at the Hanoverian post office in Celle.[9] The quality of 1737: 'the King reading with Sir Robert [Walpole, the Hanoverian interception remained high throughout the Prime Minister] some intercepted letters from century. In 1750, Frederick II of Prussia informed the Germany, which, said that, now the Queen was gone, Sir French envoy that the Hanoverians had broken his Robert would have no protection.'[15] cipher.[10] It was possible to gain information from intercepts on In addition, particularly in the early decades of the the impression created by parliamentary debates, and eighteenth century, the Dutch maintained the tradition on the extent to which foreign envoys were influenced of assistance developed during William III's reign, as in by domestic British politics. Evidence of intrigues 1730 when they provided copies of the correspondence between diplomats and the opposition was more of Count Degenfeld, the new Prussian envoy in serious. Thanks to intercepts, the ministry was well London.[11] Degenfeld intercepts can be found in SP aware of the hostile intrigues of the Austrians 107.[12] Starhemberg (1725), Palm (1726-7), Kinsky (1728-30) and Strickland (1734-5), the French Broglie (1730-1)

The diminution in the quantity of surviving intercepts [16] and Chavigny (1732-6), the Prussian Reichenbach from the mid-1740s makes it harder to gauge success [17] (1726-30), the Spaniards Monteléon (1718), Pozobueno after the 1730s. Indeed, the naturally-cantankerous (1726) and Montijo (1733-5), and the Swedes Gyllenborg

George II complained about the poor quality of postal [18] (1716-17) and Sparre (mid-1730s). As a result, interception in 1752.[13] However, as a valuable context attempts were made to have envoys recalled (Broglie) for SP 107, there are indications of an important or expelled (Palm, Strickland, Gyllenborg). In 1736, an continued capability. Surviving intercepts reveal the intercept revealed a Prussian effort to develop links French plan for an invasion of Britain in 1759, while in with the Prince of Wales, who hosted opposition the mid-1760s and early 1770s, French diplomatic [19] politicians. correspondence with Sweden was regularly deciphered, and in the late 1760s French and Prussian The monarchs took a close interest in the intercepts, codes were broken. When, in 1773, Anthony Todd, who and appear to have read them regularly. Intercepts

were sent from London to Hanover when the king went supportive stance over the Polish succession was there. In addition, royal instructions were sought on the noted,[24] but other envoys saw British policy to be pro- best way in which to make use of their intelligence.[20] Russian. Baron Sparre, the Swedish envoy, reported being informed by Harrington of the Russian invasion of Intercepts were also of value in understanding the Poland, which was aimed at thwarting the election of foreign policies and domestic politics of other powers. the French candidate, Stanislaus Leszczynski: The surviving intercepts, for which the best evidence and source is SP 107, suggest that the British were able 'I could sufficiently observe by his discourse, that to benefit from a mass of information and opinion in seeing King Stanislaus' election could not be hindered assessing these policies, although their value was otherwise, those advices were not unacceptable to the limited by measures taken to avoid interception such as Court here; for he absolutely took the part of the the use of couriers. The use of couriers restricted Russians, saying … that by a treaty of 1717, Russia as potential interception of messages to their points of guarantor was obliged to maintain the Liberty of departure or arrival, rather than en route. In 1735, the Poland, against all force and oppression, nor to permit British successfully recruited François de Bussy, a King Stanislaus to be chosen …. From this discourse of senior member of the French Foreign Ministry, the Secretary of State as well as from diverse others of although they subsequently failed in an effort to recruit his before, as also from other intelligence I have here Germain Louis Chauvelin, the French Foreign at Court, I am certain that the Court is now more in the Minister.[21] In 1738, an Englishman detained in Calais Russian interest, than I ever suspected they would be. I and interrogated by the French claimed that George will not accuse them that they are so of inclination; but Robinson, a former MP, who had fled Britain in 1732 the alliance with the Emperor [Charles VI, ruler of when his frauds had been discovered, had been able, Austria] and the safety of the King's German dominions for a period of about three years,to gain copies of [Hanover] upon the foot of his present system, may be French diplomatic correspondence in Paris and to send the true motives thereto.'[25] them to London.[22] Sparre followed up by reporting that, although A close reading of SP 107 provides a valuable Harrington had disclaimed to him any pro-Russian supplement to the regular diplomatic correspondence tendencies, 'this Court believes they find their account in State Papers Foreign. This can be seen in the by the Russian Court better now than they have done development of Anglo-Russian relations in the 1730s. for these fourteen years past.'[26] Such material is a Anxiety was recognisably there in the early 1730s as crucial supplement to British diplomatic can be seen from several examples. There is an correspondence and an important part of the sources interesting discussion in 1732 between William, 1st Earl available for an understanding of British foreign policy of Harrington, the Secretary of State for the Northern in the period in which Britain became the world's Department, and the Danish envoy Count Rantzau, on leading power. the Russian naval threat in the Baltic.[23] The following year, the British rejection of Russian pressure to take a

ENDNOTES Fortescue (ed.), The Correspondence of King George the Third from 1760 to December 1783 (6 vols, 1928), III, 39-40. [1] K. de Leeuw, 'The Black Chamber in the Dutch Republic during the War of the Spanish Succession and its Aftermath, 1707- [15] P. Cunningham (ed.), The Letters of Horace Walpole I (Edinburgh, 1715,' Historical Journal, 42 (1999), pp. 133-56 and 'Cryptology in the 1906), p. cxxxviii. Dutch Republic: A Case-Study,' in The History of Information Security, edited by K. de Leeuw and J. Bergstra (Amsterdam, 2007), pp. 327-67. [16] NA SP107/20

[2] E. Boutaric (ed.), Correspondance secrete inédite de Louis XV sur la [17] NA SP107/1C politique étranagère (2 vols, Paris, 1886); M. Braubach, Die Gehemdiplomatie des Prinzen Eugen von Savoyan (Cologne, 1962). [18] NA SP107/1B

[3] K. Ellis, The Post Office in the Eighteenth Century: A Study in [19] Administrative History (London, 1958) and 'The Administrative NA SP 107/21 Connections between Britain and Hanover,' Journal of the Society of Archivsists 3 (1969), pp. 556-66; P. Fritz, 'The Anti-Jacobite [20] Newcastle to George II, 4 April 1730, NA. S. 36/18; undated Intelligence System of the English Ministers, 1715-1745,' Historical correspondence between George II and Townshend, William Coxe Journal, 16 (1973), pp. 265-89, and The English Ministers and (ed.), Walpole (3 vols, London, 1798), II, 536-7. Jacobitism between the Rebellions of 1715 and 1745 (Toronto, 1975).

Fritz has little to say about the situation after 1727. [21] st Robert Walpole to James, 1 Earl Waldegrave, envoy in France, 7 March 1737, Chewton, Waldegrave papers. [4] Mr Thomas to C. Lechmere, 1 May 1838, NA. SP. 107/1. [22] 'Interrogation du … Thomas Limpous,' 27 July 1738, AE. CP. Ang. [5] E.g. George Stepney to James Vernon, 19 September 1693, NA. SP.

80/17. [23] Rantzau to Count Rosenkranz, 25 March 1732, NA. SP. 107/5.

[6] NA SP 90/27 [24] Count Philip Kinsky, Austrian envoy, to the Emperor Charles VI, 11 September 1733, NA. SP. 107/16. [7] Ellis, Post Office, pp. 66-8, 127-42; J.C. Sainty, Officials of the

Secretaries of State 1660-1782 (London, 1973), pp. 51-2; W. Gibson, 'An [25] Sparre to the Swedish first minister, Count Horn, 21 August 1733, Eighteenth-Century Paradox: The Career of the Decipherer-Bishop, NA. SP. 107/15. Edward Willes,' British Journal for Eighteenth-Century Studies, 12 (1989), pp. 69-76. [26] Sparre to Horn, 25 August 1733, NA. SP. 107/15. See also, same to same, 11 September 1733, NA. SP. 107/16. [8] J. Black, 'British Intelligence and the Mid-eighteenth-century Crisis,' Intelligence and National Security, 2 (1987), pp. 209-16, and 'Eighteenth-century Intercepted Dispatches,' Journal of the Society of Archivists, 11 (1990), pp. 138-43.

[9] Ellis, Post Office, p. 74, 'Administrative Connections,' pp. 560-1, and 'British Communications and Diplomacy in the Eighteenth Century,' Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, 31 (1958), p. 163; B. Peterson, '"The Correspondent in Paris": en engelsk informationaskalle udner 1700-talet,' Scandia, 27 (1961), pp. 387-99; S.P. Oakley, 'The Interception of Posts in Celle, 1694-1700,' in R. Hatton and J.S. Bromley (eds), William III and Louis XIV (Liverpool, 1968), pp. 95-116.

[10] Polit. Corresp 7, pp. 281-2, 290.

[11] Philip, 4th Earl of Chesterfield, envoy in The Hague to George Tilson, Under-Secretary, 10 October 1730, NA. SP. 84/308.

[12] Degenfeldt to Grumbkow, Extract. 15 August 1730. NA. SP 107/2 f.1.

[13] Thomas, Duke of Newcastle, Secretary of State for the Northern Department, to Henry Pelham, First Lord of the Treasury, 26 July 1752, BL. Add. 35412.

[14] B. Williams, The Life of William Pitt, Earl of Chatham (2 vols, London, 1913), I, 399; Oakley, 'Interception,' p. 95; BL. Add. 32309; Sir John

CITATION

Black, Jeremy: “State Papers Confidential.” State Papers Online, Eighteenth Century 1714-1782 (Part IV), Cengage Learning (EMEA) Ltd, 2018

@GaleEMEA